散货船上，如果有风暴压载舱（其中的一个货舱），那这个货舱要不要接入压载水处理...

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 08:04

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 01:11
通过你的回复，我感觉你把压载水污染和油污然搞混淆了。根本没有理解我发MARPOL I 18.3.2 和18.3.1的母的 ...

你自己看看开会的文件不就行了？号都给你了。你找了吗？看了吗？文件里写的比你说的清楚多了。
虽然文件是三哥提的，前因后果一样写的清清楚楚。70次会议通告也很清楚，不需要修订公约。有不懂的就看三哥提的文件，怎么考虑的写的非常清楚。
别人告诉你出处了，想反驳就拿着出处文件指出哪说错了，比如出处文件里没写or写的和我理解的不是一个意思。喜欢按着自己的理解那一堆别的规范那还问什么呢。

最后再说一次，IMO不允许风暴压载不处理就排放到任何签署公约的国家，对于各港口国，可能有法规免除，如USCG。油船不是让你不处理，而是可以参考MARPOL，这两个不冲突。

另外说USCG里的置换我觉得你是在逗我。看一眼行吗

bareboat · 发表于 2019-7-26 08:51

青语发表于 2019-7-26 08:04
你自己看看开会的文件不就行了？号都给你了。你找了吗？看了吗？文件里写的比你说的清楚多了。
虽然文件 ...

看来，我要把USCG的 title 33 贴出来啦。

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 08:59

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 08:51
看来，我要把USCG的 title 33 贴出来啦。

33？你会不会看？谁跟你说在33里？
对于你不接的情况，属于没有安装参照FAQ里
What compliance alternatives are available for a vessel that is past its compliance date and which has not implemented an approved BWM method in accordance with 33 CFR

Prior to arrival, and subject to all due safety considerations by the master, a vessel may elect to discharge beyond the applicability of the BWM regulations (12 nm offshore) in a quantity that allows it to enter port and commence cargo loading operations without an accompanying discharge within 12 nm of shore.

你到底懂不懂为什么说USCG允许12海里以外去排，你懂不懂公约要求？还是你准备货舱装满水去港口装货吗？

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 09:01

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 08:51
看来，我要把USCG的 title 33 贴出来啦。

ABS的也给你，自己去找！去看！去学！你觉得你会就别问！
BWMS Challenges with Bulk Carriers/TST Gravity Discharge Configuration
Bulk carriers, one of the largest segments of the merchant shipping fleet, are highly ballast-dependent. Some of these bulk carriers, possessing Topside Water Ballast Tanks (TST) not connected to the Bottom Side Water Ballast Tanks (BSWBT) and which often de-ballast directly overboard by gravity discharge, complicate BWMS selection. For these vessels, the selection of a suitable BWMS requires additional considerations. TST gravity discharge operations are incompatible with most IMO and USCG type approved BWMS.
To date, all UV-based BWMS require re-treatment by UV during discharge and most active substance based BWMS require neutralization (mandatory for compliance with the type approval certificate requirements) before discharging overboard. Retreatment (i.e., UV re-dose or neutralization) process requires the TST to be re-routed back to the BSWBT or ballast headers to perform retreatment during de-ballasting. Other alternative measures include selecting a BWMS that does not require secondary treatment, allowing overboard discharge of the TST or to install a dedicated BWMS for the TST. However, this might increase the capital and operating expenses due to additional equipment and associated components.
Heavy weather ballast for bulk carriers remains unclear today. The IMO BWM Convention does not allow untreated heavy weather ballast (HWB) to be discharged in waters of any Administration signatory to the Convention. During MEPC 70, the Committee agreed that HWB used for crude oil carriers was a MARPOL Annex I issue and would not be addressed within the IMO BWM Convention (MEPC). However, the same has not been rectified for bulk carriers using heavy weather ballast. The USCG allows discharge of untreated HWB to waters of the U.S. outside 12 nm and many signatory Administrations to the BWM Convention might allow similar discharges at some determined distance from land.
However, the need to treat HWB ballast could result in additional footprint and weight considerations for the BWMS retrofit. For some active substance-based BWMS, treating HWB will require additional chemical storage capacities (treatment and neutralization chemicals). Total energy consumption for HWB ballasted and de-ballasted may change the BWMS selection criteria.

bareboat · 发表于 2019-7-26 10:48

青语发表于 2019-7-26 09:01
ABS的也给你，自己去找！去看！去学！你觉得你会就别问！
BWMS Challenges with Bulk Carriers/TST Grav ...

你哪种眼睛看到重力排放就不需要处理了。“ther alternative measures include selecting a BWMS that does not require secondary treatment, allowing overboard discharge of the TST or to install a dedicated BWMS for the TST. However, this might increase the capital and operating expenses due to additional equipment and associated components.”。那我就给你普及一下有一种压载水处理装置是通过脱氧方式处理的，压载水进来的时候处理一下，然后排放的时候就可以直接排放了。再不懂，我把厂家资料借给你看。
关于你说的marpol I 18.3.2的免除 “2 in exceptional cases where the particular character of the operation of an oil tanker renders it necessary to carry ballast water in excess of the quantity required under paragraph 2 of this regulation, provided that such operation of the oil tanker falls under the category of exceptional cases as established by the Organization. For the purpose of application of regulation 18.3.2, the following operations of oil tankers are regarded as falling within the category of exceptional cases:

.1 when combination carriers are required to operate beneath loading or unloading gantries;

.2 when tankers are required to pass under a low bridge;

.3 when local port or canal regulations require specific draughts for safe navigation;

.4 when loading and unloading arrangements require the tanker to be at a draught deeper than that achieved when all segregated ballast tanks are full;

.5 close-up inspection or/and steel thickness measurement using rafts where permitted by the rules; and

.6 tank hydrostatic pressure tests
”，我在14楼或者15楼的时候就说过了。你觉得和我们的风暴压载是一回事吗？再次鉴定。我也把你推荐的MEPC 69/4/12 放进来。

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 12:27

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 10:48
你哪种眼睛看到重力排放就不需要处理了。“ther alternative measures include selecting a BWMS that do ...

你去眼科医院看看吧。
我说的是

不知道为什么不接，正常改完系统就是接进去了，重力压排载是不可以的。
莫非原船就是单独的？

所有船级社要求都是一样的，如果厂家系统排载不需要再次经过系统处理，不需要中和注药等过程，那么就可以直接排载，该情况顶边舱是可以重力排载，另外有的厂家即使不再次处理，不需要中和等过程，也会要求你过他的系统，这是当时厂家对规范的理解问题，型式认可就做成这样了没办法，所以我说 “正常改完的情况系统接入重力压排载不可以。”

另外上面ABS原文我都给你贴了，你还觉得我能错，你是脑子有问题么？风暴压载ABS上面写的很清楚了，看不懂就抄一遍。

再说一次，需要处理。我跟你说很多次了。
还有我没说过MARPOL是免除，这是你自己说的，因为你不懂，看不明白我在提什么，觉得我让你按MARPOL annex I就是油船可以免除，还是那句话，是不是压载水？
按MARPOL annex I意思就是告诉你有这一条需要看，这条怎么适用在MEPC 69/4/12 里写的很详细，其他情况按压载水公约。
免除是港口国的权利，我也写很多次了。

看不懂就多看看，别无理搅三分，别人没说的话不要自己给别人加。另外拿出点学习的态度，从你回复看就是完全不懂压载水处理。还是建议把公约适用范围抄一下。

最后我就想问一句，用正常人的思维想，正常情况你装着一货舱未处理的压载水去别人家港口排，那你别的舱就算处理了有什么用？？？我就不懂这问题有什么可问的？？？

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 12:28

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 10:48
你哪种眼睛看到重力排放就不需要处理了。“ther alternative measures include selecting a BWMS that do ...

Heavy weather ballast for bulk carriers remains unclear today. The IMO BWM Convention does not allow untreated heavy weather ballast (HWB) to be discharged in waters of any Administration signatory to the Convention. During MEPC 70, the Committee agreed that HWB used for crude oil carriers was a MARPOL Annex I issue and would not be addressed within the IMO BWM Convention (MEPC). However, the same has not been rectified for bulk carriers using heavy weather ballast. The USCG allows discharge of untreated HWB to waters of the U.S. outside 12 nm and many signatory Administrations to the BWM Convention might allow similar discharges at some determined distance from land.
However, the need to treat HWB ballast could result in additional footprint and weight considerations for the BWMS retrofit. For some active substance-based BWMS, treating HWB will require additional chemical storage capacities (treatment and neutralization chemicals). Total energy consumption for HWB ballasted and de-ballasted may change the BWMS selection criteria.

我就觉得这是眼睛瞎了才看不见。

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 12:32

单独强调一次，MARPOL没有免除压载水处理。
你说这句就是完全没看我前面说的70次会议和MEPC 69/4/12，因为MEPC 69/4/12的意思就是在问要不要额外免除。而70次会议认为二者不冲突。
别人说的你不看就别讨论了。你先把我说的几个原文拿来粘贴一下吧，你这态度剩下的不想给你找了。

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 12:39

正常要接我说了很多次了。
不接怎么办也说了很多次了。
另外不接的情况无论怎么都对应要改BWMP，很麻烦。这条算补充。

你爱怎么做就怎么做吧，说白了做错了也跟我没什么关系。

上面的提到资料已经够你理解了，看完要是觉得还不接那就别接。

对于这个帖子的问题，我只负责回答建议接。

bareboat · 发表于 2019-7-26 12:51

青语发表于 2019-7-26 12:28
Heavy weather ballast for bulk carriers remains unclear today. The IMO BWM Convention does not all ...

For these vessels, the selection of a suitable BWMS requires additional considerations. TST gravity discharge operations are incompatible with most IMO and USCG type approved BWMS

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 15:11

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 12:51
For these vessels, the selection of a suitable BWMS requires additional considerations. TST gravit ...

我就想问问这句有什么问题？with most IMO and USCG type approved BWMS

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 15:13

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 12:51
For these vessels, the selection of a suitable BWMS requires additional considerations. TST gravit ...

目前用的the most紫外线和电解都不能重力排放，TST要重力排载要盲死改到下面原船压载管OR重新做TST的压载管，一般这俩方案。有问题吗？

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-26 15:13

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 12:51
For these vessels, the selection of a suitable BWMS requires additional considerations. TST gravit ...

目前用的the most紫外线和电解都不能重力排放，TST要重力排载要盲死改到下面原船压载管OR重新做TST的压载管，一般这俩方案。有问题吗？

江海直达 · 发表于 2019-7-26 15:50

青语发表于 2019-7-26 15:13
目前用的the most紫外线和电解都不能重力排放，TST要重力排载要盲死改到下面原船压载管OR重新做TST的压载 ...

不愧是专家称号，继续努力，给网友普及更多一些知识经验。

bareboat · 发表于 2019-7-26 17:52

青语发表于 2019-7-26 15:11
我就想问问这句有什么问题？with most IMO and USCG type approved BWMS

重力排放的方式和大部分的认可的压载水处理装置的处理方式不兼容。因此，要实现直接重力排放，需要选择排放前不需要处理的压载水处理装置，比如脱氧的那种。由此可以推出，不是说重力排放的不要处理，而是因为选择的压载水处理装置的方法不同，导致它排放前不要处理。

bareboat · 发表于 2019-7-26 17:54

青语发表于 2019-7-26 15:13
目前用的the most紫外线和电解都不能重力排放，TST要重力排载要盲死改到下面原船压载管OR重新做TST的压载 ...

26楼说重力排放不可以。只是你选择的压载水处理装置的处理方式导致不可以。

青语 · 发表于 2019-7-27 02:08

bareboat 发表于 2019-7-26 17:54
26楼说重力排放不可以。只是你选择的压载水处理装置的处理方式导致不可以。

所有船级社要求都是一样的，如果厂家系统排载不需要再次经过系统处理，不需要中和注药等过程，那么就可以直接排载，该情况顶边舱是可以重力排载，另外有的厂家即使不再次处理，不需要中和等过程，也会要求你过他的系统，这是当时厂家对规范的理解问题，型式认可就做成这样了没办法，所以我说 “正常改完的情况系统接入重力压排载不可以。”

你复读我也复读。

bareboat · 发表于 2019-7-27 11:22

case by baee .

飞海 · 发表于 2023-3-30 15:54

现在改装船都没接入，本来那个舱就是应急用的，感觉不需要

散货船上，如果有风暴压载舱（其中的一个货舱），那这个货舱要不要接入 压载水处理...

散货船上，如果有风暴压载舱（其中的一个货舱），那这个货舱要不要接入压载水处理...